Kansans speak out about laws they’d like to see repealed

Topeka  Gov. Sam Brownback’s administration has received approximately 250 suggestions to repeal certain state laws, regulations and executive orders, according to Secretary of Administration Dennis Taylor, who serves as the State Repealer.

Taylor said most of the ideas have come from citizens.

“They run the gamut from telecommunications fees to agriculture, environmental, and health regulations to taxes (sales, income, property tax exemptions) and property assessment reporting requirements to elimination of certain state agencies to elimination of laws governing personal conduct including laws against DUI, regulations requiring drug tests, and prohibitions against sodomy and adultery,” Taylor said in a recent email.

Taylor said he will present Brownback with a set of repeal suggestions within the next two weeks.

He said any repeals of statutes would require legislation, while repeals of regulations would have to be reviewed by the Joint Committee on Rules and Regulations. Brownback can repeal executive orders.

Brownback established the Office of the Repealer in January through his first executive order, saying he wanted to shed any out of date, unreasonable and burdensome measures.

There's a lot of poorly written statues on the state books. It's already implicit, but KS authorities should note when attempting to enforce the law that under the constitution protected speech does not usually equal harassment. The WA State laws on harassment explicitly note that constitutionally protected speech will not be prosecuted as harassment.

Statements that KU is dishonestly not following the law should not be perversely twisted and represented as attempts to threaten or harass their unethical HR officials. It's a Kafkaesque world when you on the basis of principle and idealism point out official corruption, and then these high-minded people turn the story inside-out and blame the victim. The criminalization of speech and protest since 9/11 is undermining democracy.

I hope that everyone that does not like the "special taxing districts" to be able to tax us "behind our backs" fills out the form and complains about how you don't even know when you are in one until after you've already made a purchase and then examine your receipt.

"repeals of regulations would have to be reviewed by the Joint Committee on Rules and Regulations. Brownback can repeal executive orders"

While it is true that the committee reviews agencies' action regarding regulations, the act of revoking regulations start with the agency and then are reviewed by the committee. The committee's recommendations are not binding.

So the agency can revoke the regulation with or without the blessing of the committee.

Why is it your business what I do in the privacy of my own home? How does sodomy or drug use vicitmize you? These laws are worthless and should be removed immediately. When's the last time anyone was convicted of adultry anyway? I personally know of a Topeka police officer who repeatedly committed adultry with a friend of mines wife. I brought it to the attention of the police and they laughed it off. Get rid of these worthless laws that are cherry picked by police and prosecutors as they see fit.

Ah, a fine example of, "You see what you want to see; you hear what you want to hear".

You see the word, "drug" and you instantly jump to its defense, even before you have considered the context of the statement.

You and I both know that not all jobs mandate drug testing for all, and we know that even those who have "random" drug testing, aren't really all that "random".

With that said, do you think that drug testing should be eliminated from jobs? Would you be okay with cops patrolling the streets on meth? How about firefighters on crack-cocaine? Would you be okay if your surgeon is doped up on prescription meds? How about a drunk childcare provider? You don't think things through, but rather only see what you want to see. You read an article, you read a response that's not "pro-drug", and instantly you lose all common sense in the matter because you can't see past your own personal biases.

As far as the sodomy and adultery, I quoted the entire line that was in that article, but while we're at it, let's discuss it. I did not say that the law was anything but moot. Once again, you're only seeing what you want to see. I said that I found the suggestion amusing. Why? Who out there supports adultery? Why, adulterers, of course! I find it laughable that someone would actually take the time to bother with drafting such a request.

Laws are often written based of a majority's view of what is moral and what is not. I believe that most would agree that adultery is an "immoral" behavior. Is it enforced? Not likely, except perhaps in certain applicable circumstances. I find it funny that you're arguing that such laws need to be repealed because "police and prosecutors" aren't enforcing it. Honestly, do you think that our justice system has the time or concern to go out and prosecute adulterers? Perhaps an "adultery task force" should be commissioned? There are few laws written that are enforced 100%. Are you going to tell me that police cite or arrest every single person out there that's caught littering? Hell, don't you see those signs posted? You can serve time in jail for that or pay thousands in fines!!! (there's some sarcasm in there, if you look carefully)

Quality people? 300 million plus in amerikkka. What do you consider a quality person? Laws are nothing but ink on paper....agreed upons by people who may or may not have had all the facts...who may or may not have been persuaded for reasons other than the truth...certainly without the best interests of the people as a whole in mind. Have you ever read the history of marijuana prohibition? The blatant racist propoganda used by certain industries (timber, cotton, pharmaceutical, petroleum, etcetera) to demonize a harmless plant would not hold up in today's world.
Read "The Emperor Wears No Clothes" by Jack Herer. http://www.jackherer.com/thebook/